St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-01-25
THE DOGS OF WAR.
They Will Possibly Be Let Loose
on Great Britain by the United
States,
Unless There is Some Cessation to
the Outrages Perpetrated by
Canada
On American Fishermen, Who Have Been
Abused, Maltreated and Finan-
cially Despoiled.
The Senate Clearly Indicates Purpose to
Garry Retaliation to the Uttermost
Limits,
And. As Preliminary Step, Almost
Unanimously Passes the Fish
cries Bill.
And. As a Preliminary Step, Almost
Unanimously Passes the Fish
cries Bill.
England Denounced as a Rufiian,
Coward and Bully Among the
Nations.


ceeded TO the consideration of the senate
Dill to authorize the president of the United
States to protect and defend the rights of
American fishing vessels, American fisher
men and American trading and other YES
sells in certain cases. MI Hoar suggested
the question of the words ''or unjustIy
veXed or harassed therein by the authorities
thereof" He thought the bi would be
made much safer if it contained that gen.
eral phraseology. Mr.. Ingalls, thought
these fishery difficulties must be settled
either by negotiation or war. This meas
Ure was distinctly one of retaliation. It
was an eye for all eye, tooth for tooth, a
fish for fish, an insult for an insult, a
wrong for wrong. He thoughG it impor-
tant, before the senate was called upon
to vote, that the committee on
foreign relations should advise the senate
whether the measure was intended to be
pacific or hostile. whether it was, in effect
al invitation to negotiate or practically a
declaration of war. There was no use in
Disgusting the proposition. There was a
feeling of irritation (the real party in inter-
est being Great Britain and not Canada),
which was at any moment. if the present
attitude was continued, liable to lead to
discomfort, which might ripen into eXas-
peratiOn and this into open hostility. 1t
was, therefore, of very great Importance
that, at the threshold. the outset. in the
vestibule, the senate should understand
whether the bill was intended as a pacific
or a hostile measure. He quoted some
sentences from the report of the committee
on foreign relations and remarked that
countries had been inundated with blood on
less proVocaton. The conduct of the Do
minion and of Great Britain according to
this report) was sufficient to warrant
declaration of war on the part Of the
United States. 1t was violation, not only
of treaty rights guaranteed by repeated
cOnVentiOnS), but it showed purpose on
the part of the government of Canada and
of her lnajesty's government to harraSs and
annoy and
DESTROY AMERICAN FISHING INTERESTS,
simply for the purpose either of private
gain or of some public advantage. 1t ap-
peared to him that. in view of these grave
allegations. i'll the irritation and discomfort
known to exist between the two countries,
the reporting of a measure which author
lied the president to enter simply on a
process of retaliation, was hardly consist
ent with the gravity of the situation. It
was dangerous course to authorize the
president to continue in the same line of
conduct and policy, with the inevitable
result either of finally negotiating for the
purpose of settling these questions or else
of going to war in defense of rights under
the treaty of 1918. He thought it would
be better, more in accordance with the dig
nifty of the subject and with the morality
which ought to prevail among nations as
among men, to declare as the conviction of
the senate that the relations between the
two powers are such as to require negotia
tions, and that there should be an authority,
not to issue letters of marque and re-
prisal, but to select commission to
consider the subject and, if possible,
to reach some basis of an understanding be-
tween Great Britain. Canada and the
United States in regard to the fisheries.
Mr.. Frye said that Mr.. Ingalls, seemed to
forget that Canada was playing the same
role now which she had played twice be
fore. She played it but for one purpose,
and that was to secure negotiations for re-
ciprocal treaties, and these reciprocal
treaties had turued out to the disadvantage
Of the United States and TO the advantage
of Canada. He believed it his duty to
group the outrageS which had been COM
mitted by Canada within the last six
months, and then he would let the senator
from Kansas (Mr. Ingalls) say whether or
not he thought the United States ought to
resort at once to negotiations. Mr.. Frye
proceeded to particularZe many of the out
RACES to which American fishing vessels had
been subjected in Canadian waters. Among
them was the case of an American vessel
which had brought into a Canadian port
seventeen shipwrecked Canadian Sailors
and had been refused the right to purchase
barrel of flour to keep the crew from star
vation. He declared the annals of history.
even of the Fiji islands, might be searched
without finding
a CASE so BRUTAL
and so inhuman. He also quoted the case
of the Marion Grimes, an American
schooner, whose flag was hauled down by
Capt Quigiey, of the Canadian cutter
Terror. All these cases, he said, had been
brought to the attention of the British
government. That government knew the
utter inhumanity of these cases, and knew
that outrageS had been committed in viola
ton of law as we'll as good neighborhOod.
Mr. Vest inquired of Mr. Frye whether in
the case of the hauling down of the Ameri-
can flag, the government of Great Britain
indursed that action of Capt. Quigley. aud
whether, on the contrary, that government
had not expressly diSavowed the act and
apologiZed for it. He read from the report
a note from the English foreign office to
the Canadian government on the Subjece.
Mr.. Edmunds suggested that Capt.
Ouigley was still in the government servic.
MI Frye quoted from recent statute passed
bv the Dominion government in still further
hostility to American fishermen, and said
that that legislation had been approved by
the British government. The hope. there
fore that Great Britain would do what was
fair and lust was destroyed. and it might
have been known that that would have
been the result. There was not line, he
said, in the history of Great Britain for the
last 800 wears that gave the slightest reason
to believe that,
IN THE PURSUIT OF GAIN,
in the pursuit of trade, she would ever per-
NIT the right of another to stand in the way
of her progress. Every one of the cases he
had referred to was in violation of the
spirjt and four out of five Of them were in
violation of the letter, Of the treaty OF 1918.
Every one of them was in violation of the
rules of good neighborhoOd, Of the civiliza-
j ton of the day, and of the understanding
of all civilized nations as to the rights of
foreign ships in their ports. But the
American people know that they
are 60, 0O0 600; they know that they
are the richest nation Ofsthe earth. They
know their power, and they would not hui
initiate themselves and do violence to their
conscious pride by resorting to little, miser-
able tricks and outrages by way of retalia-
ton. What the committee on foreign rela-
tions sought was that the president of the
United States should be empowered to close
Tho ,,ortc of tha TTnitad States against any